Taxes for Thee, Exemptions for Me?

Descripción

A debate over tourism promotion funding exposed a growing frustration in Clallam County: local hotels and vacation rentals are required to collect lodging taxes that fund tourism campaigns, while one of the region’s largest hospitality empires benefits from those campaigns without paying into the system. What Is LTAC? Tourism promotion in Clallam County is funded largely through the Lodging Tax Advisory Committee, commonly known as LTAC. The program collects lodging taxes from hotels, motels, vacation rentals, and Airbnbs, then redistributes those dollars to festivals, events, marketing campaigns, and organizations designed to attract visitors to the Olympic Peninsula. The theory is simple: bring in tourists, fill hotel rooms, boost shopping and restaurant traffic, and strengthen the local economy. At the April 9 LTAC meeting, Commissioner Randy Johnson and committee members reviewed funding applications for 2026 tourism promotion efforts. Several organizations requested support. Joyce Daze sought $5,000 to market its annual festival and draw out-of-town visitors. The Port Angeles Waterfront District requested $50,000 for tourism promotion efforts aimed at increasing regional visitation. The Sequim City Band also requested $5,000 to help host the Association of Concert Bands Regional Connections Event scheduled for July 24–25, 2026. The event is expected to bring approximately 350 musicians and attendees from neighboring counties and other states for concerts, clinics, workshops, and performances hosted at the James Center for Performing Arts in Sequim. Organizers estimate roughly 100 hotel rooms will be rented during the conference. On the surface, it sounds like exactly the type of economic activity LTAC was designed to encourage. Until you look at where much of the event activity and lodging will occur. Who Benefits From the Tourism Push? A significant portion of the conference is expected to take place at the Jamestown Corporation-owned 7 Cedars Hotel and Resort in Blyn, with RV attendees expected to stay at the tribe’s Salish Trails RV Park. Organizers also noted arrangements with Olympic View Inn in Sequim, but the Jamestown Corporation properties are positioned to receive substantial benefit from the tourism campaign funded through county lodging taxes. And that immediately raised a familiar question. Commissioner Randy Johnson was the first to openly acknowledge the issue during the LTAC discussion. “The one item… that this also highlights is the issue of a tribal hotel that doesn’t contribute to lodging tax,” Johnson said during the meeting. He added, “This gives me a reason to send another letter to the tribe.” Johnson was referring to the August 2025 letter [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/commissioners-kick-the-can-on-tribal?utm_source=publication-search] sent by the Clallam County Board of Commissioners to the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe requesting a conversation about the tribe contributing property and lodging taxes. That letter has since become a politically sensitive subject. The “Fair Share” Debate At a recent commissioner forum, a resident asked whether the commissioners planned to follow up on the request for the Jamestown Corporation to pay what the commenter described as its “fair share” of property and lodging taxes. Johnson acknowledged he had not sent a follow-up letter. Commissioner Mark Ozias, attending remotely and unable to respond before boarding a flight to Maui, reportedly told the commissioners that he may have contacted someone informally about the issue. Commissioner Mike French then stepped in to defend the county’s relationship with the tribe, explaining that Clallam County’s “sovereign neighbors” operate on different “time scales,” which he described as “often uncomfortable for us, but it is just how their governments work.” French also criticized the phrase “fair share,” calling it disrespectful to tribal sovereignty. “They are a sovereign nation,” French said. “That is not how that relationship works.” While French objected to the wording of a resident’s question as disrespectful, he has previously used nearly identical language himself in other contexts. A Different Standard? In 2020, French posted publicly about illegal marijuana grow operations and black-market activity. In that post, he wrote: “The least concern of all is that taxes don’t get paid — it’s still an issue, people should pay their fair share…” French’s earlier comments argued that tax avoidance harms communities and shifts burdens elsewhere. Why does that principle apply strongly to illegal cannabis operations but becomes inappropriate terminology when discussing tribal-owned hospitality businesses competing directly against tax-paying local hotels, inns, and vacation rentals? The issue extends beyond philosophy. Local lodging businesses throughout Clallam County are required to collect taxes that help fund tourism campaigns and marketing efforts. Those dollars are then used to attract visitors who may ultimately stay at tax-exempt tribal-owned lodging properties. In effect, competitors are funding promotional campaigns that benefit businesses operating outside the same tax structure. “Not My Job” French later stated he would not personally pursue follow-up discussions because he is not the county liaison to the Jamestown Tribe. That explanation frustrated some residents, particularly because all three commissioners signed the original August 2025 letter. While commissioners campaign countywide and make decisions affecting taxpayers throughout Clallam County, responsibility suddenly narrows when politically sensitive issues involving tribal taxation arise. Even more puzzling to some observers was the contradiction. If French believed it was inappropriate for him to follow up because he was not the liaison, why did he sign the original letter in the first place? And if decisions made by the Jamestown Corporation impact the tax burden of residents throughout the county, every commissioner has an obligation to represent taxpayers on the issue — especially in a countywide elected office. Ozias Suggests a Different Path The conversation took another turn yesterday when Commissioner Ozias floated a different approach altogether. Rather than focusing on lodging tax payments, Ozias suggested tribal governments could instead help meet tourism promotion goals through cultural participation — sharing tribal history, storytelling, educational events, and performances that would attract visitors to the region. The concept resembled the type of cultural tourism often marketed in Hawaii — an idea Ozias appeared to bring back from the recent conference he attended in Maui. Supporters may view the idea as collaborative and culturally enriching. However, there is a different dynamic emerging: tribal enterprises remain exempt from lodging taxes while participating directly in tourism marketing efforts that could further increase business at tribal-owned hotels, RV parks, and vacation properties. To opponents, it feels less like equal participation and more like a system where competitors pay into the tourism fund while exempt entities simultaneously benefit from both the marketing and the exemption itself. First, the county loses the tax revenue, then tourism campaigns funded by competitors help drive business toward exempt properties, and finally the arrangement is celebrated as a partnership. The Larger Question For many residents and business owners, the core question remains unresolved: Should businesses competing in the same tourism marketplace operate under fundamentally different financial obligations when public tourism dollars are involved? “When one side bears all the costs and the other reaps all the rewards, it is no longer cooperation — it is exploitation.” — John C. Maxwell Today’s Tidbit: PDN Returning to Balance? Two excellent letters to the editor from the Peninsula Daily News last weekend. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

The NGO Revolving Door: The Commissioners Keep Writing Checks While Taxpayers Get Locked Out

A simple email exchange between a Clallam County resident and Habitat for Humanity reflects a growing frustration across the county: taxpayers fund projects, commissioners celebrate the spending, and nonprofits ask for more money, but when citizens ask basic questions about results or accountability, the answers become vague. From stalled housing projects to nonprofit financial failures, the same pattern keeps repeating itself while residents asking questions are treated like the problem. “The Project Is Not at the Stage to Share This Information Yet” A short email exchange between a Clallam County resident and Habitat for Humanity of Clallam County may perfectly capture the culture that now defines local government. The resident asked a simple question: What project was using the $800,000 the Clallam County Commissioners approved for Habitat through the county’s Opportunity Fund? The money, Habitat explained, was going toward “Lyons Landing,” a proposed 45-home development in Carlsborg. Then came the obvious follow-up question: Can taxpayers see the grant numbers, project numbers, and cost centers to understand how the money is being spent? That answer was different. “The project is not at the stage to share this information yet.” Habitat’s CEO, Colleen Robinson, was copied on the exchange more a week ago and, as of publication, has not responded to the resident’s questions. It has now been a year and a half since county commissioners approved the funding. Aside from a ceremonial groundbreaking photo opportunity featuring county officials, Habitat leadership, and tribal representatives standing together with shovels in a vacant lot, little work has occurred on the property north of Sunny Farms in Carlsborg. And that response — “we’re not ready to share that information yet” — says a great deal about how Clallam County now operates. Public Money, Private Transparency To be fair, Habitat for Humanity is legally within its rights. It is a nonprofit organization, not a government agency. Once taxpayer money leaves county government and is handed to an NGO, much of the public transparency disappears with it. Citizens cannot demand internal budgets the way they can from government departments. Public records laws no longer apply in the same way. The money may have originated from taxpayers, but once it changes hands, public visibility ends. That is exactly why oversight before funding approvals matters so much. The controversy surrounding Lyons Landing began in late 2024 [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/the-advantages-of-being-disadvantaged?utm_source=publication-search] when the Opportunity Fund Advisory Board recommended awarding Habitat $800,000 for the project. The Opportunity Fund collects a portion of local sales tax revenue and distributes it to economic development projects throughout the county. Problems emerged after it became public that Habitat did not intend to competitively bid major portions of the development. Instead, significant excavation, surveying, and concrete work was expected to go to Jamestown Corporation businesses. The issue raised eyebrows because Jamestown Corporation had also donated $50,000 to Habitat for Humanity. The county paused the award for months while legal review examined whether public funds could legally be used in a project structure that appeared to bypass traditional competitive bidding requirements intended to protect taxpayers and ensure fair pricing. Eventually, the funding was approved. Today, the property still sits vacant. That makes the public’s questions entirely reasonable. What work has been completed? How much of the $800,000 has been spent? What exactly are taxpayers funding? Instead of answers, the public is increasingly told to simply trust the process. When Journalism Starts Reading Like Advertising At the same time taxpayers are being denied answers, local newspapers continue publishing glowing nonprofit-written features celebrating community partnerships, fundraising dinners, wine tastings, and awareness campaigns. One recent Habitat for Humanity article spent far more time discussing silent auctions, wine festivals, and “turning strangers into supporters” than it did discussing measurable housing production. Readers were told repeatedly how important Habitat’s mission is and why the organization needs continued support. What readers were not told was how many homes Habitat is currently delivering annually, how much each completed housing unit costs, how long projects are taking, or how much taxpayer money is now flowing into the organization from local government sources. Another detail stood out as well. Many of Habitat’s major fundraising events are hosted at Jamestown Corporation properties, including Cedars at Dungeness. That raises a reasonable question: do other local venues ever have the opportunity to host these high-profile nonprofit events and receive the economic benefit and exposure that comes with them? Or are these relationships increasingly concentrated among politically connected organizations and tribal enterprises? The question becomes even more relevant given Habitat’s emphasis on its Native American Housing Liaison program [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/habitat-for-humanity-or-habit-for?utm_source=publication-search] and its close partnerships with Jamestown entities. These are not unreasonable questions. In a healthy civic environment, they would simply be part of public accountability. Instead, people who ask them are often treated as troublemakers. The Humane Society Warning Signs Everyone Ignored This same pattern has repeated itself across Clallam County for years. One of the clearest examples occurred during a December 2023 Clallam County Commissioner work session involving the Olympic Peninsula Humane Society. Executive Director Luanne Hinkle appeared before commissioners requesting an increase in county funding from $104,000 annually to $125,000 annually. Hinkle opened the presentation by explaining that her goal was to show commissioners that county money was “very well spent.” Commissioners asked one of the most basic financial questions imaginable: what is the cost per kennel? Hinkle said it was difficult to calculate. No estimate was provided. No follow-up pressure came from the commissioners. During the presentation, Hinkle acknowledged that animals were regularly transferred into the shelter system from outside Clallam County. The discussion relied heavily on emotional appeals about vulnerable animals, overcrowding, and community tensions, but offered little hard financial analysis. The commissioners praised the organization anyway. Then came perhaps the most revealing moment of the entire meeting. As the discussion wrapped up, Commissioner Randy Johnson’s final question was not about costs, operational efficiency, or financial sustainability. “Are you and your husband planning a trip when you retire?” he asked. Within months, the Humane Society suffered a financial collapse [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/humane-society-hits-ruff-patch?utm_source=publication-search] that shocked much of the community. The Bark House facility shut down. Dog intake operations effectively stopped. Reports surfaced alleging serious internal dysfunction [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/inhumane-society?utm_source=publication-search], including claims involving employee treatment and controlled substances intended for animals. Financial records showed that while revenue had significantly declined, salaries and compensation had surged. IRS Form 990 filings showed total revenue dropping from roughly $1.5 million to $1.18 million in a single year, while salaries, compensation, and benefits increased from approximately $758,000 to more than $1 million. Luanne Hinkle’s compensation jumped nearly 50 percent in one year, rising from about $95,000 to nearly $142,000. At the same time, tax documents showed that only 8% of total spending went directly toward animal care itself. Yet despite all of this, the Humane Society had already received taxpayer support, public praise, and minimal scrutiny from county leadership. The Weekly NGO Parade And that is the broader story here. Every week, nonprofits rotate through county commissioner meetings asking for taxpayer money. Housing nonprofits. Behavioral health nonprofits. Arts nonprofits. Food nonprofits. Animal nonprofits. Outreach nonprofits. The presentations are almost always emotional. The scrutiny is almost always light. The commissioners routinely thank the organizations for their work, praise their missions, and approve additional funding. Sometimes those same commissioners simultaneously sit on boards connected to the very nonprofits receiving public money. One recent example is OlyCAP’s “safe parking” program [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/the-olycap-illusion-public-money?utm_source=publication-search] in Sequim, where over $118,000 in taxpayer funding was approved for what amounts to three overnight parking spaces. Residents asking where the money is going and what measurable outcomes justify the expense have struggled to get clear answers from either OlyCAP or the county. The silence is especially troubling because Commissioner Mike French not only voted on funding connected to OlyCAP, but he also sits on OlyCAP’s board [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/when-county-commissioners-fund-the?utm_source=publication-search]. That dual role creates an obvious expectation for transparency and accountability, yet residents increasingly feel they are met with silence. Questions about measurable outcomes, operational efficiency, and financial accountability are often secondary to narratives about compassion, partnerships, and community investment. Meanwhile, taxpayers increasingly feel like the only people ever told “no” are the citizens asking for transparency. The Disappearance of the Local Watchdog The larger problem is cultural. Local journalism once acted as a watchdog over government and public spending. Increasingly, many local publications now resemble public relations platforms for government agencies, nonprofits, and publicly funded initiatives. Residents are constantly told how transformative programs are, how critical funding is, and why even more taxpayer support is necessary. What is often missing are measurable outcomes and adversarial scrutiny. How many homes were built?How many people exited homelessness permanently?How much did each project cost taxpayers?What are the actual performance metrics?What happens when organizations fail? Those questions are becoming rarer and rarer. Instead, the public is asked to trust institutions that increasingly resist transparency while continuing to demand larger amounts of taxpayer money. This Is the Culture Now This has become the norm in Clallam County. Government praises nonprofits. Nonprofits praise government. Local media amplifies both. Taxpayers fund the entire system while struggling to obtain basic answers about where the money went and whether any of it is actually working. Commissioners get to look compassionate and generous while handing out public money. NGOs receive funding, glowing media coverage, and reduced scrutiny. Meanwhile, residents asking hard questions are portrayed as cynical, divisive, or anti-community. And while millions continue flowing into studies, outreach programs, partnerships, consultants, and nonprofit initiatives, many residents increasingly feel the county’s most basic responsibilities — public safety, infrastructure, accountability, and transparency — are slipping further out of reach. This is not an isolated incident. It is the culture. And until voters demand something different, the revolving door will continue spinning exactly as it does now. “The bureaucracy is expanding to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.” — Oscar Wilde Today’s Tidbit: Jake in Joyce Join County Commissioner candidate Jake Seegers this Saturday at the Joyce General Store for a casual Community Conversation focused on the future of Clallam County. Stop by anytime between noon and 2pm to meet Jake, share your concerns, pick up a yard sign, and sign the growing petition [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/reopening-the-elwhaa-community-led?utm_source=publication-search] to restore access to Olympic National Park by reopening Olympic Hot Springs Road into the Elwha Valley. The petition effort is calling on state and federal leaders to prioritize restoring one of the county’s most important recreational and economic corridors. Reopening the road is about more than access — it’s about supporting local tourism, protecting gateway communities, and reconnecting families to one of the most iconic areas of the Olympic Peninsula. Residents are encouraged to stop in, ask questions, and be part of the conversation about public safety, government accountability, economic priorities, and the future direction of Clallam County. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

28 de may de 202639 min

When County Commissioners Fund the NGOs They Sit On

A young mother stood before the Clallam County Commissioners earlier this month and spoke candidly about the fear of homelessness. She said rising housing costs and the removal of affordable housing options are pushing families to the brink. “This will only kill people,” she warned. Sitting in the room listening were Commissioner Mike French and OlyCAP Housing Director Viola Ware. French sits on OlyCAP’s Board of Directors. Weeks later, basic questions about a taxpayer-funded “safe parking” program tied to OlyCAP and a Sequim church still remain unanswered, even as public records show French seconded a motion approving additional funding connected to the program without recusing himself. A young mother struggling to stay housed recently came before the Clallam County Commissioners and shared something many residents quietly fear every day: even working families are one lease renewal away from instability. She explained she had finally found housing large enough for her and her children, but admitted she had no idea what would happen when the lease expired. “When my six month lease is up, I don’t know what we are going to do,” she told commissioners. She spoke about housing costs spiraling beyond reach for ordinary residents. Buying a home is unattainable. Rentals are scarce. Affordable housing options continue disappearing. The public testimony was emotional, raw, and remarkably honest. What was equally remarkable was who was sitting in the room listening. Among those present was Viola Ware, chair of the County’s Homelessness Task Force and Housing Director for Olympic Community Action Programs — better known as OlyCAP. Also sitting there nodding empathetically was Clallam County Commissioner Mike French. French is not simply a county liaison to OlyCAP. IRS filings from 2024 [https://olycap.org/hubfs/documents/financials/olycap-2024-form-990.pdf?hsLang=en] list him as a member of OlyCAP’s Board of Directors. OlyCAP is a nonprofit organization serving Clallam and Jefferson Counties. Founded in 1966 as a Community Action Agency, it administers a wide range of publicly funded programs, including housing assistance, homelessness prevention, food programs, energy assistance, Head Start, senior services, and case management programs. The organization relies heavily on federal, state, and local taxpayer funding while partnering closely with local governments. Earlier in the meeting, the commissioners issued a proclamation celebrating OlyCAP’s 60th anniversary. Viola Ware was there to accept it. Yet after the young mother finished describing her fears about homelessness, neither the commissioners nor OlyCAP representatives publicly directed her toward assistance programs or followed up with her concerns during the meeting. Instead, it was a member of the public sitting in the audience who informed her that OlyCAP may have services available. It was a missed opportunity for both Commissioner French and OlyCAP. “The Safe Parking Program Is Not an OlyCAP Program” During public comment, Viola Ware attempted to clarify what she described as misconceptions surrounding the Safe Parking Program operating through Trinity United Methodist Church in Sequim. “The safe parking program is not an OlyCAP program,” Ware explained. According to Ware, the program is managed by Trinity United Methodist Church, while OlyCAP partners with the church by providing staffing and support services. Ware explained that OlyCAP provides approximately one hour of staffing support in the evening, one hour in the morning, and maintains one staff member on-call overnight should emergencies arise. OlyCAP also provides supportive services to participants. “But we do it for free,” Ware said about the supportive services. However, public records obtained by a CC Watchdog subscriber paint a more complicated picture. County contract documents show that Clallam County approved up to $118,780 in taxpayer funding for the Safe Parking Program through Trinity United Methodist Church. The agreement specifically states that Trinity United Methodist Church’s Safe Parking Program operates “in partnership with Olympic Community Action Programs.” The contract outlines funding for staffing, benefits, phones, on-call coverage, security, operations, maintenance, and direct services. The scope of work explicitly identifies OlyCAP staffing positions tied to the program, including: * Safe Parking Manager * Evening Coordinators * Morning Coordinators * On-call phone support The records also include OlyCAP payroll records, time sheets, invoices, and reimbursement documents tied to Safe Parking staffing. The Safe Parking Program appears less focused on permanently moving people out of homelessness and more focused on managing homelessness indefinitely by giving participants a place to sleep in their vehicles. The invoices and supporting records obtained by one Watchdogger show substantial spending tied to staffing, coordination, on-call coverage, and administrative support related to OlyCAP. The program increasingly resembles a publicly funded homelessness management and employment infrastructure rather than a measurable pathway out of homelessness. Taxpayers still do not know how many participants have successfully transitioned into permanent housing, how long individuals typically remain in the program, or what objective outcomes justify the continued expense. At the end of the day, the public is still looking at more than $118,000 tied to just three parking spaces — a figure that is difficult to defend, especially in the absence of clear performance metrics. Two Weeks of Questions — Still No Answers Today marks two weeks since CC Watchdog began asking questions about the Safe Parking Program and the public funding surrounding it. Other residents have been seeking answers for months. Among the unanswered questions: * How exactly is the $118,780 being spent? * How many individuals have utilized the program? * How many participants are currently enrolled? Questions directed to Trinity United Methodist Church were answered with an invitation to attend the upcoming Homelessness Task Force meeting rather than with direct responses. The response stated: “To learn more, you’re invited to attend the Homeless Task Force meeting June 2.” The Homelessness Task Force meeting [https://clallamcowa.portal.civicclerk.com/event/246/files] is scheduled for Tuesday, June 2, at 2:30 p.m. in the commissioners’ board room. Remote and in-person attendance are allowed. The Ethics Questions The larger issue now extends beyond the Safe Parking Program itself. It involves transparency and ethics regarding elected officials voting on funding for organizations on whose boards they serve. The Municipal Research and Services Center (MRSC), which provides legal and governance guidance to Washington municipalities, addresses these issues under Chapter 42.23 RCW, dealing with conflicts of interest. MRSC guidance states [https://mrsc.org/getmedia/1e641718-94a0-408b-b9d9-42b2e1d8180d/Knowing-The-Territory.pdf.aspx?ext=.pdf&utm_source=chatgpt.com] that local elected officials generally may not have a “beneficial interest” in contracts made under their supervision. Even when an official’s involvement qualifies as a “remote interest,” MRSC guidance states the official should disclose the interest publicly and abstain from voting. MRSC further emphasizes avoiding not only actual conflicts of interest, but even the appearance of impropriety or special privilege. Importantly, Washington law distinguishes between: * serving on a nonprofit board without compensation, and * receiving direct financial benefit. Simply serving on an NGO board is not automatically illegal. However, MRSC guidance [https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/february-2022/resolving-financial-conflicts-of-interest?utm_source=chatgpt.com] specifically notes: “A municipal officer may not vote in the authorization, approval, or ratification of a contract in which he or she is beneficially interested…” MRSC further recommends that officials with remote interests should avoid even appearing to participate in the governing body’s action on the contract. The issue surfaced in a complaint [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/the-olycap-illusion-public-money?utm_source=publication-search] involving Jefferson County Commissioner Greg Brotherton and OlyCAP funding. That complaint cited RCW 42.23.040 and argued that even where a “remote interest” exception exists for unpaid nonprofit board service, the official’s vote should not count toward approval and the official should refrain from influencing the decision. The complaint quoted MRSC guidance stating: “It is accordingly recommended that the officer with a remote interest should not participate, or even appear to participate, in any manner in the governing body’s action on the contract.” The December 16th Vote That brings attention back to Clallam County. Minutes from the December 16 meeting show commissioners approved an agreement providing additional funding connected to Trinity United Methodist Church’s Safe Parking Program. The minutes reflect in county shorthand: * Commissioner Randy Johnson made the motion, * Commissioner Mike French seconded it, * and the motion carried. The agreement added supplemental funding tied to the Safe Parking Program, which operates in partnership with OlyCAP. No recusal by Commissioner French appears in the meeting action summary. That does not automatically mean any law was violated. But it does raise legitimate public questions: * Did Commissioner French disclose his OlyCAP board position before the vote? * Were disclosures entered into the official minutes? * Did county legal counsel review the arrangement? * Does seconding a motion involving funding tied to an organization on whose board he serves conflict with MRSC’s own recommendations? * If not, where exactly is the ethical boundary? Those answers should not require public records requests and weeks of follow-up to obtain. Because when taxpayer dollars move from county government into NGOs tied directly to elected officials, transparency is not optional. Oversight Is Not a Ceremonial Role Taxpayers have reason to ask hard questions about oversight. Commissioner French also serves on the William Shore Memorial Pool Board, where, under his watch, the Washington State Auditor found roughly $67,000 in questionable spending and serious failures in financial oversight [https://www.ccwatchdog.com/p/state-audit-finds-67000-in-questionable?utm_source=publication-search] involving the former executive director. “This report and the related audit work show the District lacked internal controls and procedures over its essential functions, including disbursements, credit cards and cash receipting. It also lacked adequate internal controls for ensuring compliance with state regulations for self-insurance.” — Washington State Auditor’s Report Public board service is not supposed to be ceremonial or résumé-building. When elected officials sit on boards overseeing taxpayer dollars, the public expects active stewardship, accountability, and transparency. Routing controversial public programs through NGOs while basic financial and performance questions remain unanswered only deepens public distrust. Commissioner Mike French now finds himself at the center of two growing public trust questions at the same time: one involving controversial homelessness spending through an NGO on whose board he serves, and another involving a public pool board that state auditors found lacked even basic financial controls. At some point, taxpayers are justified in asking whether these boards are being governed — or merely attended. “Bad officials are elected by good citizens who do not vote.” — George Jean Nathan Today’s Tidbit: Helping or Enabling? A recent letter to the editor in the Peninsula Daily News struck a nerve with many local residents frustrated by the growing normalization of homelessness in Port Angeles. Writer Jeffrey Schreck argued that when he briefly experienced homelessness years ago, discomfort and instability motivated him to quickly return to work. Today, he says, the growing network of free meals, public services, hygiene programs, warm spaces, and harm reduction resources may unintentionally reduce that urgency. Whether residents agree or disagree, the letter reflects a growing public debate over whether Clallam County’s expanding homelessness infrastructure is truly helping people recover — or simply making long-term street living more sustainable. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.ccwatchdog.com [https://www.ccwatchdog.com?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_1]

26 de may de 20261 h 14 min

Taxes for Thee, Exemptions for Me?

Descripción

Comentarios

Empieza 7 días de prueba

Todos los episodios